It highlights that the capital increase carried out that year yielded profits for investors and that the prospectus was clear
MADRID, 20 Oct. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The auditor of the consulting firm PwC José María Sanz assured this Thursday before the judge of the Santiago Pedraz National High Court that he did not detect any irregularity or anomaly when reviewing the accounts of Banco Popular for the year 2012, which in his opinion did express the real image of the entity.
Legal sources have explained to Europa Press that in his statement before the head of the Central Court of Instruction Number 5, which has lasted about an hour, Sanz has indicated that the capital increase carried out that same year left a good economic return for the investors and that the brochure that included the details of the same was explained correctly.
The version offered by the auditor has coincided with that of the former president of the entity Ángel Ron and his ‘number two’, former vice president Roberto Higuera. Both declared this Wednesday and denied any type of irregularity in the accounts and in the aforementioned extension of 2012, on which the judge puts the magnifying glass.
In this case, Judge Pedraz investigates – after admitting two complaints for processing last June – into alleged crimes of fraud against investors or breach of the duties of information in this capital increase.
It should be noted that these facts are different from those being investigated in another AN court, the Central Investigation Number 4. Specifically, Judge José Luis Calama analyzes two phases of the Popular resolution process: the alleged accounting irregularities of the entity in 2016, with the capital increase that year, and the leaks to the press a year later that would have caused its resolution in mid-2017.
Before the judge, Sanz explained how goodwill is calculated and why its value changed with the acquisition by Popular of Banco Pastor. Along these lines, he has highlighted that there is a rule that regulates when and how the valuation should be made in the case of a business combination.
That was what Popular did, explained the auditor, when effective control of the entity was taken. It was at that time that the goodwill that was generated was reviewed by EY.
The acquisition of the Pastor is one of the questions on which the judge investigates. In one of the complaints it was pointed out that the Board of Directors of Banco Popular was aware that, if it projected the reality of the company’s situation to the market, the 2012 capital increase would not achieve the desired results to achieve the injection of money with which to “patch” their critical situation, so that they decided to alter the faithful image of the entity.
And this would have been done especially, the complainants detail, after the integration of Banco Pastor’s accounts into Banco Popular, in order to give an appearance of solvency when in reality, the complaint points out, before a ruinous entity.
The auditor, however, has drawn attention to the fact that the Fundación Barrié de la Maza –the main owners of El Pastor– formed part of the board of directors of Popular at the time of the acquisition. These, in turn, participated in the 2012 capital increase.
From Sanz’s point of view, it would make little sense for the owners of Banco Pastor to decide to invest in the aforementioned expansion if they were aware that the financial situation of the acquired entity was not correct.
